The following summaries are of recent published decisions of the California appellate courts, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. The summaries are presented without regard to whether Severson & Werson represented a party in the case.
A public official does not engage in state action by blocking a person from commenting on the official's social media page or posts the official both (1) possesses actual authority to speak on the State’s behalf on a particular matter, and (2) purports to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social-media posts. Merely repeating information that is publicly… Read More
Liapes, a 46-year-old woman, alleged an actionable claim under the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code 51.5, 51) for intentionally discriminating on the basis of gender and age in targeting (and allowing advertisers to target) their ads to particular audiences of Facebook users based on chosen characteristics, including age and gender. She claimed that as a result of the ad… Read More
42 USC 1983 confers a right of action against a person who, under color of state law, acts to deprive the plaintiff of rights, privileges and immunites secured by the Constitution and laws. "Laws" means federal statutes, so long as those statutes unambiguously confer federal rights on individuals and enforcement under section 1983 does not conflict with a specific enforcement… Read More
Under the federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (42 USC 3604(f)), it is unlawful for a person to discriminate in the sale or rental of real property based on disability. This decision holds that to invoke the act's protection, the disabled person must show he bought or rented the premises or tried to. Rental for this purchase requires an… Read More
The Fair Housing Amendments Act (42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B) prohibits discrimination in the form of “a refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford [a disabled] person an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. Here, a disabled person was a month-to-month tenant. The landlord offered him a… Read More
Defendant was not a state actor for purposes of 42 USC 1983 and thus could not be sued under that section when it canceled plaintiff's license to use a portion of its leased premises to present a program by a speaker that was anti-LGBT rights and thus contrary to defendant's values. Under Burton v. Wilmington Parking Auth., 365 U.S. 715,… Read More
Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 USC 2000bb-1, 2000bb-2) allows a private right of action for "appropriate relief" against a "government," a term defined to include an official or other person acting under color of law of the United States. This decision holds that the definition of "government" expands the term's normal meaning to include officials in their individual… Read More
Under 42 USC 12182(b), an owner violates the ADA if it fails to remove architectural barriers to handicap access in existing facilities where removal is readily achievable, or, if removal is not readily achievable, if it fails to make its goods or services available to a handicapped person through alternative methods, if they can be achieved without much difficulty or… Read More
Under Gov. Code section 12974, DFEH can seek a preliminary injunction from a court to halt what it believes is a discriminatory act or practice pending completion of DFEH's administrative proceedings. Here, DFEH sought, and the trial court denied, such an injunction. The DFEH continued its administrative proceedings thereafter until the defendants in that proceeding got the trial court to… Read More
A plaintiff may state a claim under 42 USC 1981 for denial of equal rights in making or enforcing contracts by showing that race was a factor in the decision not to contract, even if not the but-for cause of the decision. Read More
Two-tier pricing based on the customer’s age violates the Unruh Civil Rights Act unless public policy embodied in statutes favors the price-advantaged age group. Read More
Defendant NCAA was entitled to summary judgment in lawsuit challenging its policy of banning anyone with a felony conviction from coaching at an NCAA-sponsored tournament, since the policy furthered the NCAA's legitimate interest in avoiding harm to minors who participated in its tournaments and avoiding liability for that harm. Read More
Plaintiff suing a federal official in her individual capacity for violation of constitutional rights may recover only damages, not injunctive or declaratory relief. Read More
